student feedback and leadership - Office for Learning and Teaching

Part A: Developing a Distributed Leadership Model - Secton 1: Framing LeadershipFigure 2 Institutional Organisation and Student Feedback ReportingStudent SatisfactionFeedback ReportUniversity CouncilVC &PresidentAcademic Board& Technical StudiesPlanning Group- Quality Unit- Student Feedback- Survey CentreDVC & PVCHeadsAll staffLocal AcademicBoardProgramCommitteesThe RMIT-NTEU Enterprise Agreement states that there is need to establisha consultative process for discussions over student feedback that includesbroader issues (such as staff workload, characteristics of the student cohort,the physical environment in which teaching takes place, the structure of thecourse, the availability of and access by students to learning resources,the method of delivery and the provision of professional developmentsupport to the employee).CES analysis is undertaken by the Student Survey Unit, with detailedresponses provided to the Head of School, Program Co-ordinators, CourseCoordinators and the individual staff member. These analyses are not providedto Service Providers.Given the multitude of staff involved with various aspects of the use of studentfeedback and the lack of clarity on leadership and responsibility of staffinvolved, the individual academic teacher has tended to be regarded as havingcentral responsibility for improving student feedback. In particular, attentionis given to the six questions in the CES combine to create a Good TeachingScale (GTS). The GTS measures students’ perceptions of teaching standardsand focuses on individual teachers’ contribution to the students learningexperience through the: provision, and amount of, assessment feedback,ability to motivate students, attention given to the problems students face,skills in explaining concepts, the effort put into making the course interesting.In addition to the CES the university has a requirement that each Programhas an established Staff-Student Consultative Committee (SSCC) that meetsseveral times a Semester. However this Committee has no formal reportingfunction (apart from the need for mention of meetings in the Program AnnualReports), there are no formal means by which students are elected to representthe views of all students, and there are no incentives for students to attendmeetings. This has resulted in student attendance at SSCC being minimal.The outcome is that student feedback on issues related to learning andteaching practice is almost exclusively reliant on the CES.Page 15